On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 1:05 PM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > James <pkx1...@gmail.com> writes: > > > Hello, > > > > On 09/12/13 14:03, Carl Peterson wrote: > >> When trying to work the Documentation/lilypond-texi2html.init file, I > have > >> observed that changing this file does not trigger the documentation to > >> rebuild when running make. However, > >> changing Documentation/css/lilypond-manuals.css triggers the entire > >> documentation to rebuild. This seems backwards, since > >> lilypond-texi2html.init touches pretty much every part of the > >> documentation, and the css file isn't actually involved in compiling > >> anything. > >> > >> The command being run to make the documentation for the website is: > >> > >> make WEB_TARGETS="offline online" doc > >> > >> per > >> > http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/contributor/debugging-website-and-docs-locally > > > > Yes the doc build system does have its quirks - the website is built > > by the same process as the PDFs. > > > > > http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/contributor-big-page.html#building-documentation > > > > I cannot say if that is related to the website, but it is possible. > > I think the point was that the content of the css file is not relevant > for creating any of the other files: the css is ultimately combined with > the other files in the _browser_. So it seems nonsensical to declare it > as a dependency for anything but those targets that copy the css file > into a target directory. >
That's part of it. But the other part is that when I edit the lilypond-texi2html.init file, it does not trigger any rebuilds when it should force the entire documentation to rebuild. I have to touch one of the manual files to get anything to happen, and then it only rebuilds that manual. _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond